This proves that one of the pilots turned off the ACARS communications link
and then reported to air traffic control (ATC) as if all was normal. Twelve minutes
later, one of the pilots switched off the aircraft's transponder, which transmits the
aircraft's altitude and location.

This sequence of events more or less proves that one of the pilots was in charge of
the aircraft. Given the lack of evidence of duress, this sequence strongly suggests
one of the pilots was executing a plan of his own rather than following orders of
hijackers.

Given the strong political views of the captain and his mastery of the Boeing 777,
all evidence points to the captain as the pilot who turned off the communication links
and was in command of the aircraft thereafter.

Though early reports on the captain were limited to neutral comments by peers that he
was a nice guy and a devout family man, the strength of his opposition to the current regime
in Malaysia is now coming to light:

Captain Zaharie Ahmad Shah, a father-of-three, was said to be a 'fanatical' supporter of the country's opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim - jailed for homosexuality just hours before the jet disappeared.

It has also been revealed that the pilot's wife and three children moved out of the family home the day before the plane went missing.

Anwar Ibrahim is a broadly popular democracy icon and former deputy prime minister whose prosecution on a charge of sodomy is seen by many Malaysians as political persecution.

‘Colleagues made it clear to us that he was someone who held strong political beliefs and was strident in his support for Anwar Ibrahim,’ another investigation source said. ‘We were told by one colleague he was obsessed with politics.’

What makes this significant is the Malaysian authorities' attempts to suppress this
possible motive.

Malaysian officials initially appeared keen not to direct any suspicion towards Zaharie or his co-pilot, 27-year-old Fariq Abdul Hamid, who was last week revealed to have invited two women passengers into the cockpit and smoked on an earlier flight to Phuket.

But evidence of the way the plane’s transponder and communication systems were disabled and the way the plane was expertly flown over the Indian Ocean apparently using navigational waypoints meant only a skilled aviator could have been at the controls. Investigators were also baffled by why, if hijackers took over the plane, there was no Mayday call or signal from the two pilots to say the cockpit had been breached.

Thus we have motive and clear evidence that it was the captain, not the co-pilot,
who was in command of Flight 370. Enraged by the Soviet-style show-trial and imprisonment of his political hero,
the captain may have "sabotaged the flight as a form of drastic political protest."
Flight 370: Was Hijacking The Pilot’s Political Revenge?

Now add in that neither the co-pilot nor the captain requested each other, and it seems
increasing likely that the captain was making it up as he went along,
applying his deep knowledge of the aircraft and navigation to sketch out a makeshift
initial plan that was dynamically modified along the way.

I think we can easily trace a plausible series of steps the captain initially took,
and then speculate knowledgeably about the challenges and decision trees that arose later
in the flight.

The first challenge would be to render the co-pilot unable to contest his control of the
aircraft. The easiest way would have been to dissolve a sedative in a beverage and
coax the co-pilot into drinking the Mickey Finn.

The "mumbling co-pilot" heard by the airline pilot flying to Japan who radioed Flight
370 offers tantalizing (if scant) evidence of this. (Interestingly, that pilot was
confident he spoke with the co-pilot, not the captain.)

Alternatively, the co-pilot fought for control of the aircraft, one explanation of
the abrupt climb to 45,000, well above the aircraft's designed ceiling.

If there was a struggle, clearly the co-pilot lost that battle or had already been
incapacitated by other means.

Another explanation for the climb to 45,000 feet and the subsequent drop to 23,000 feet is that
the captain sought to deprive the passengers of oxygen for long enough to render them
unconscious but not long enough to kill them.

Given the profile of the captain that is emerging, I see little evidence of a personality
who would set out to kill everyone on board, including himself. I believe the evidence
strongly suggests a political motive, to embarrass the Malaysian government and
perhaps to do so by seeking asylum in another country.

Once again, the key here is to understand the incomplete nature of the captain's
plan: after the initial phase was successful--turning off the ACARS and transponder,
incapacitating the co-pilot, and moving beyond the range of Malaysia's military radar--
a number of destinations might have occurred to the captain. It's important to note
that flying was not just the captain's vocation, it was also his hobby. I think it is safe to
say his life revolved around aviation and flying.

Data showing the number of plausible runways where the plane could have touched down -
which need to be at least 5,000ft - offer a baffling number of potential locations.

According to a map drawn up by U.S. radio station WNYC, there are 634 locations which
could fit, from Australia to the Maldives to Pakistan.

However, the true number is likely to be even higher, as estimates of how far the plane
could have travelled have been increased since the calculations were carried out.

Here is the best current map of the possible routes of Flight 370. I have added
the decision tree the captain faced: either fly north and seek political asylum
or a remote landing site or fly south and search for a remote landing site.

if the co-pilot had regained control of the aircraft, either alone or with the aid
of crew and passengers, he would have first turned on the ACARS and transponder
and sent a Mayday signal. Since this didn't happen, we can be confident that the captain
was in command of Flight 370 for the duration of the flight--roughly 7.5 hours.

While we don't know if the aircraft landed at some point, we do know the last ping to
the satellite was at 8:11 a.m., roughly 6 hours after the last military radar contact.

Here are some other points to consider:

The fact that the Malaysian authorities withheld the sequence of events in the cockpit
strongly suggest that they quickly identified the potential for a political motivation
for the flight deviation and sought to suppress speculation along this line of inquiry.

This also explains why they withheld the military radar data for three days, and their
continuing reluctance to share information or come clean about what they know. They fear
the truth, and with good reason.

The captain's home flight simulator suggests that he may well have practiced all sorts
of landing scenarios, just out of curiosity or to sharpen his skills in outlier situations.
Think about it: if you already have over 18,000 hours in the cockpits of advanced
aircraft, you're not going to practice conventional landings you could do in your sleep.
That would be beyond boring to someone of his experience.

Given the few hours the captain had to assemble his plan, it is likely that once the initial phase
was successful, he might have changed his mind, perhaps more than once.

Given his long experience in aviation, I think it very likely that he knew that
the primary and military radars in the region were usually turned off at night.
Off-the-record confirmations of this have come from Thailand and Indian officials
with knowledge of radar covering the Andaman and Nicobar islands.

Thus it is not surprising there were no primary radar sightings in the region: most or perhaps
all of the radars were turned off.

It's also worth noting that most of the primary radars in the region have limited ranges--100
miles or less appears to be average. It is more than possible to thread a flight
through the gaps in coverage, even if the radars were active.

Let's assume my speculation is accurate and the captain had no intention of crashing the
777 and killing all on board. As I noted in my first entry on Flight 370, if that was his
intention (or simply suicide), why fly for hours? Despite his best intentions, he may have
encountered some problem that he responded to incorrectly; it's even possible that he
missed his intended destination or became confused about his location.

The scenario that best fits the facts is a spontaneously initiated
"drastic political protest" by the captain that went awry, despite his intentions and
experience.

One last thought: since the U.S. must monitor potential airborne threats and
nuclear explosions virtually everywhere on the planet (with the exception of
Antarctica), why wouldn't the U.S. have wide-aperture thermal imaging assets in space?
And if the U.S. has space-based thermal imaging assets, would they be so low quality
that the heat signature from two large jet engines would not show up? That seems unlikely.

Since it has long been known that the U.S. has "wired the oceans for sound,"
(SUBMARINES, SECRETS, AND SPIES - NOVA/PBS) it's also likely that
the sound of a large aircraft hitting the water would also have been detected,
regardless of the remoteness of the location.

All of which is to say that it seems probable that the global and space-based
intelligence gathering assets of the U.S. recorded some sort of signals that could
provide clues to the final resting spot of Flight 370.

Update: according to aviation sources, MH370's
climb to 45,000 feet (well above its designed ceiling) would have probably required reducing
weight by dumping fuel. This calls the accuracy of this altitude data into question.

These sources
also note that depressurizing the cabin could have been accomplished without climbing
to 45,000 feet, and such a depressurization to cause unconsciousness cannot be
controlled with any precision. This largely eliminates motivation for the climb to 45,000, if the aircraft
did indeed reach that altitude.

Another intriguing possibility for the lack of radar contact has surfaced:
Did MH370 disappear by flying in the radar shadow of SIA68 (another 777)?
I cannot confirm the technical viability of this tactic, but the author makes a
well-researched case for the possibility that Flight 370 followed another 777 closely
enough that the radar signal would have been presumed to be a single aircraft.

The Nearly Free University and The Emerging Economy:
The Revolution in Higher Education

Reconnecting higher education, livelihoods and the economy

With the soaring cost of higher education, has the value a college degree been turned upside down?
College tuition and fees are up 1000% since 1980. Half of all recent college graduates are jobless or underemployed, revealing a deep disconnect between higher education and the job market.

It is no surprise everyone is asking: Where is the return on investment? Is the assumption that higher education returns greater prosperity no longer true? And if this is the case, how does this impact you, your children and grandchildren?

We must thoroughly understand the twin revolutions now fundamentally changing our world:
The true cost of higher education and an economy that seems to re-shape itself minute to minute.

The Nearly Free University and the Emerging Economy clearly describes the
underlying dynamics at work - and, more importantly, lays out a new low-cost model for
higher education: how digital technology is enabling a revolution in higher education
that dramatically lowers costs while expanding the opportunities for students of all ages.

The Nearly Free University and the Emerging Economy provides clarity and
optimism in a period of the greatest change our educational systems and society have seen,
and offers everyone the tools needed to prosper in the Emerging Economy.

Things are falling apart--that is obvious. But why are they falling
apart? The reasons are complex and global. Our economy and society have structural
problems that cannot be solved by adding debt to debt. We are becoming poorer, not
just from financial over-reach, but from fundamental forces that are not easy to identify.
We will cover the five core reasons why things are falling apart:

Complex systems weakened by diminishing returns collapse under their
own weight and are replaced by systems that are simpler, faster and affordable. If
we cling to the old ways, our system will disintegrate. If we want sustainable prosperity
rather than collapse, we must embrace a new model that
is Decentralized, Adaptive, Transparent and Accountable (DATA).

We are not powerless. Once we accept responsibility, we become powerful.

NOTE: Contributions/subscriptions are acknowledged in the order received. Your name and email
remain confidential and will not be given to any other individual, company or agency.

Thank you, David K. ($50), for your formidably generous contribution
to this site -- I am greatly honored by your steadfast support and readership.

Thank you, Mark M. ($15), for your extremely generous contribution
to this site -- I am greatly honored by your support and readership.

"This guy is THE leading visionary on reality.
He routinely discusses things which no one else has talked about, yet,
turn out to be quite relevant months later."
--Walt Howard, commenting about CHS on another blog.

"You shine a bright and piercing light out into an ever-darkening world."
Jeremy Beck

Contributors and subscribers enable Of Two Minds to post 275+ free essays annually.
It is for this reason they are Heroes and Heroines of New Media. Without your
financial support, the free content would disappear for the simple reason
that I cannot keep body and soul together on my meager book sales alone.

Subscribers ($5/mo) and those who have contributed $50 or more annually
(or made multiple contributions totalling $50 or more) receive
weekly exclusive Musings Reports via email ($50/year is about 96 cents a week).

Each weekly Musings Report offers five features:
1. Exclusive essay on a diverse range of topics
2. Summary of the blog this week
3. Best thing that happened to me this week
4. Market Musings--commentary on the economy & global markets
5. From Left Field (a limited selection of interesting links)

I am honored if you link to this essay, or print a copy for your own use.

Terms of Service:
All content on this blog is provided by Trewe LLC for informational purposes only. The owner of this
blog makes no representations as to the accuracy or completeness of any information
on this site or found by following any link on this site. The owner will not be liable
for any errors or omissions in this information nor for the availability of this information.
The owner will not be liable for any losses, injuries, or damages from the display or
use of this information. These terms and conditions of use are subject to change at
anytime and without notice.